E. J. Dionne: Serf

Free men claim natural rights. On the other hand, serfs settle for whatever few rights their masters allow them. E. J. Dionne is a serf. American free man hold that they have God given rights, which aree protected, but not created by the Constitution of the United State. Modern day serfs, on the other hand, settle for those rights doled out by the Supreme court.

WASHINGTON — In knocking down the District of Columbia’s 32-year ban on handgun possession, the conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court have shown again their willingness to abandon precedent in order to do whatever is necessary to further the agenda of the contemporary political right

Dionne is laboring under the impression that Supreme Court is our master, and we are only allowed such rights as the Court deems fit to allow. The right for free men to carry arms is not a right created by the Constitution. It is fundamental right of free men protected by the Constitution: United States v. Cruikshank [2](1876):

“[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed…”

Dionne[1] attempt to pawn off the Second Amendment as some supposed collective right, by hinting at United States v. Miller (1939) without actually citing the case:

But these pragmatic judgments underestimate how radical this decision is in light of the operating precedents of the last 69 years. The United States and its gun owners have done perfectly well since 1939, when an earlier Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment as implying a collective right to bear arms, but not an individual right

Dionne has good reason to not actually cite Miller[3]. , because the case does not hold what Dionne purports it to. While Miller devotes a lot verbage talking about the militia, the court never questioned Jack Miller’s standing, or utter lack thereof, in the militia. Rather the court’s sole question pertained to the status of Miller’s weapon, to wit a sawed-off shotgun:

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State of Tennessee, 2 Humph., Tenn., 154, 158.

Dione is a serf. Are you a free man, or are you a serf?

Addendum: (Bit)

As I said Friday: What all this boils down to is who is the best at protecting us… we, ourselves, or the government. No shock, that the left, who never sees a government power it doesn’t like, is on the leading edge of this fight. Dionne, unsurpisingly, says it’s the government. I’m willing to bet that Dionne doesn’t spend much time in the monument area of DC after dark. He might, under those conditions be arguing a different case.